4 ms·
I went through the same exercise recently, and came to a different conclusion. I’m blown away, and I can see how this is the future, and it’s a good thing. Whi
by ModernMech 4y ago
I went through the same exercise recently, and came to a different conclusion. I’m blown away, and I can see how this is the future, and it’s a good thing.
While I agree the current state of affairs isn’t great, we have to look past today to where things are going.
As far as I can tell tools like Midjourney do enable an iterative creative process. It’s more like painting with a pinball machine than directly with brushes. You have control over the process but only very tenuously. Things can go very wrong with generation that are out of your control, but the control you do have is magical.
I used Midjourney to try and generate a character for a project. I started with a source image and a description, and through hours of refining and regeneration, I finally got a character I liked.
- Did I steal the character from someone else? No, the character as far as I can tell is a unique one that I arrived at after sifting through thousands of variations.
- Did I copy a style? Well no it really, I made a character. I can then apply any style I want to it. The style is orthogonal to my goals of character generation.
- Did I get the result through no work of my own? Well I certainly lack the skill to draw the image I landed on. The only technical skill I used was clicking a button and entering text. But that’s the best part! Anyone can do this!
The skill I was actually using was my mind’s eye in guiding the iterative prompts, choosing when to blend images, choosing the words and the seed images, etc. That’s a higher-level creative process than moving the brush in the canvas. And you know who will be best at this? Artists!
The way I see it, this is a case of the punch card writer being replaced by the compiler. The punch card writer has all the skills necessary to use the compiler to continue producing programs as they were before, but faster.
Yes, artists are threatened by this. But they shouldn’t be because they are the most qualified to leverage these tools and to wield them competently. The game used to be to start from a blank canvas and to use an iterative creative process to build a scene that you picture in your head. Nothing has changed about that except now the canvas starts filled. But it still needs to be molded and pushed toward what’s in the kind of the artist. That’s where the artistry comes in.
- ChatGTP 4y agoYou're conflating the two concepts sorry, there is using new technologies to make art, I totally see the merit and value in this. Then there is making money from other peoples work, making a knock off machine. A service exists which allows people to rip off other artists work and pass it off as their own and hide that fact in the fact it's "generated". Some artists styles are so prolific, so great that if you're just lazily having ChatGPT generate that for you then using it for commercial gain, or not crediting them, that's theft in my view. I'm not talking about new technologies that enable new types of art, I'm talking about a platform that enables mass scale rips offs. I'd feel completely different about it if artists were able to lend their art works to the training model voluntarily for training and even receive some royalties overtime. In fact, I think that's a pretty cool business idea.
- ModernMech 4y agoI don’t think I’m conflating anything. What I’m saying is that the tool is there now, and while it can be used to blatantly rip off other people’s work, the tool can also be used creatively, and in a way that doesn’t rip anyone off. So while the ripping off isn’t great, that’s something which can be fixed, and you’ve given a great suggestion on how to do so. But in the meantime, the tech is advancing, and digging in our heels isn’t an option. The upside is far too great to society imo. The legal and social environment will normalize around it, but it isn’t going away.